As You Recall From Earlier Weeks Various Philosophical Orien

As You Recall From Earlier Weeks Various Philosophical Orientations H

As you recall from earlier weeks, various philosophical orientations hold unique epistemological and ontological assumptions. These assumptions return to the forefront of attention when considering how to evaluate the rigor or quality of various qualitative research designs. Typically, when speaking of validity, qualitative researchers are referring to research that is credible and trustworthy, i.e., the extent to which one can have confidence in the study’s findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Generalizability, a marker of reliability, is typically not a main purpose of qualitative research because the researcher rarely selects a random sample with a goal to generalize to a population or to other settings and groups.

Rather, a qualitative researcher’s goal is often to understand a unique event or a purposively selected group of individuals. Therefore, when speaking of reliability, qualitative researchers are typically referring to research that is consistent or dependable (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), i.e., the extent to which the findings of the study are consistent with the data that was collected. References Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Paper For Above instruction

Evaluating the quality of qualitative research involves considerations that are deeply rooted in the philosophical foundations of the approach. Two critical criteria for assessing qualitative research are credibility and dependability. Credibility pertains to the trustworthiness and plausibility of the findings from the perspective of the participants and the context in which the research occurs. Dependability, on the other hand, relates to the consistency and reliability of the research process and findings over time and across different contexts. Both criteria help ensure that qualitative research accurately reflects the phenomena being studied and can be considered rigorous and meaningful.

Credibility is fundamentally linked to epistemological assumptions about knowledge and reality. Many qualitative approaches assume a constructivist or interpretivist epistemology, which posits that knowledge is subjective and co-constructed through social interactions. This perspective emphasizes understanding subjective experiences and meanings, thus requiring researchers to establish the credibility of their interpretations through techniques such as member checking, triangulation, and rich, thick descriptions. These strategies allow researchers to validate their findings by ensuring they accurately reflect participants’ perspectives and the context of the research (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Consequently, the requirement for credibility aligns with epistemological views that recognize multiple realities and the importance of participant validation.

Dependability, meanwhile, connects to ontological assumptions about the nature of reality. Many qualitative paradigms assume a relativist or real-world view, acknowledging that social phenomena are complex and context-dependent. Dependability is achieved by maintaining an audit trail, peer debriefing, and detailed documentation of the research process. These standards facilitate transparency and allow others to follow the research process, thereby verifying its consistency and robustness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Dependability reinforces an ontological stance that reality is not fixed but shaped by social, cultural, and contextual factors, emphasizing the importance of consistency in capturing these dynamics.

An ethical issue commonly encountered in qualitative research is confidentiality and privacy, especially when dealing with sensitive topics or vulnerable populations. Researchers face the challenge of ensuring that participants’ identities and data are protected, which influences design decisions such as anonymizing data and obtaining informed consent. Ethical considerations may lead researchers to use pseudonyms, secure storage methods, and limit access to data to prevent harm. These choices can affect data collection strategies, the depth of data shared, and overall transparency. Ethical vigilance is crucial because breaches of confidentiality can undermine participant trust, skew the data, and compromise the integrity of the study.

A research topic is considered amenable to qualitative study when it involves complex social phenomena that require in-depth exploration of subjective experiences, cultural meanings, or contextual influences. Qualitative methods are particularly suited for topics that seek to understand "how" and "why" questions rather than quantifying variables or establishing causal relationships. Such topics often involve human behaviors, perceptions, and social processes that are better captured through rich descriptions, interviews, observations, and case studies. The ability of qualitative research to uncover nuanced insights makes it especially valuable for examining phenomena where human perceptions and social contexts are central to understanding the issue at hand (Denzin & Lincoln, 2018).

References

• Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The Sage handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage Publications.
• Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications.
• Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research. Sage Publications.
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage Publications.
• Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
• Silverman, D. (2016). Qualitative research. Sage Publications.
• Venkatesh, V., et al. (2013). "User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view." MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425-478.
• Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1999). "Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences." In Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163-188). Sage Publications.
• Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). "Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron?" Quality & Quantity, 41(2), 233-249.